Not Paying NCAA Athletes Is Immoral – Here’s A Solution

SwimSwam welcomes reader submissions about all topics aquatic, and if it’s well-written and well-thought, we might just post it under our “Shouts from the Stands” series. We don’t necessarily endorse the content of the Shouts from the Stands posts, and the opinions remain those of their authors. If you have thoughts to share, please [email protected]

This “Shouts from the Stands” submission comes from Emily White:

Over the past few weeks, months and years, we have celebrated some of the best athletes in the world. This past year, Simone Manuel becoming the first woman to go 45 seconds in the 100 yard freestyle was especially powerful for me. We’ve had our emotions toyed with as basketball games such as Wisconsin vs. Florida resulted in multiple “buzzer beaters” over a single game. Caeleb Dressel may have put up an even more infamous swim than if he had gone 39 seconds: 40.00; .01 away from what swimmers would call SCY immortality.

Then we watched 5’5” Morgan Williams shoot her way into history with her game winning shot against the Goliath of college sportsthe previously undefeated UConn Huskies. I mean honestly, is there a greater moment in sports than what Morgan achieved for and with her team? I’d be hard pressed to name one.

Yet when I watch these world-class athletes, my excitement is intertwined with a sickening emotion—the understanding that these athletes aren’t paid. I’ve brought this up to family members who deeply care about athletes and love college sports. The common response – “But they’re getting an education.” Are they? According to HBO, 60 Minutes, and Joe Nocera of The New York Times, this isn’t always the case. Not to mention the athletes who get injured while playing for the NCAA, which can both end their career and leave the athlete on their own for future health care costs resulting from the injury. This isn’t just in the “big sports.” I personally know of at least one Olympic athlete who was unable to pursue her major / field of choice (which would greatly benefit her life and career now), because it conflicted with swim practice.

As a peace offering, let’s also state that plenty of athletes – myself included – did receive an education in exchange for committing to a college sports team for upwards of 30+ hours a week of training, travel and competitions. It is worth noting here that, as a respected artist manager in my professional career, I received my first ever ‘B’ in college in Artist Management class. Why? The class met once a week on the one night my team always had dual meets, which led to a lower grade than what my actual career would reflect.

The indentured servitude of NCAA athletes has been well documented. I personally find it uncomfortable to celebrate athletes that are legal adults whose sports’ organizations ban them from receiving any sort of money beyond expenses. Admittedly, I do not wish to be the person that untangles the billions of dollars that have been generated due to college athletes over the years. That said, in the indie music world – record labels split income 50/50 with the person(s) who creates the content (a.k.a. the artist). Which is what I’m going to propose here for my sport of swimming. A sport that is a microcosm of all other non-major sports both in the NCAA and beyond.

Amazingly, it wasn’t until now 6x Olympic medalist Missy Franklin opted to swim for UC-Berkeley for 2 years that it came to my attention that swimming is openly labeled a “non-revenue sport.” What better time is there to change that while lines were stretching around the block to get into swim meets to see Missy and her team of Olympians and National Teamers compete? Charge $5. Even better, charge a donation and have a Square reader to accept card payments. That way, other students who don’t necessarily have income can attend the meet, as can donors who want to actively and directly support the program they are spending their Saturdays cheering for. Plenty of young girls, boys, and parents would have bought Franklin, Bootsma, and Pelton Cal Tshirts and caps, similar to jerseys in other sports. Autograph sessions were set up for the athletes, which is nice, but that is even more time that the athletes are promoting their program and school, in lieu of training, studying, or working (with what little time they have left over) for some spending money.

What do we do with these new revenue streams? Simple: half goes to the swim team (or the sports program of the specific school that generated the revenue) and half goes to the athlete when the income is derived specifically because of their name. Totally fair for the stars, while giving the whole team financial benefits. And for the rest of us, who weren’t Olympic medalists in college, this provides additional goals to work towards.

These are two new revenue streams that will work and contribute to resource-rich storied college swim teams such as Cal, Stanford, Georgia, and others.

But what if you’re Mallory Comerford? The Louisville sophomore turned heads beyond the swimming world by tying Katie Ledecky to be crowned co-champion in the 200 Freestyle at last month’s Women’s NCAA Championships. Is Mallory supported by her program that is totally on the rise? Absolutely. Will they support her post-college, “post-grad?” Most likely. But having a place to train isn’t always enough.

What I’d like to see is for athletes like Mallory to be able to accept funds to further their swimming career post-college. I’m proposing that each school is represented by an agent, with the bigger school’s teams having individual agents. This is already in place, with almost all NCAA schools being represented by major agencies – my alma mater Northeastern University is repped by CAA – one the largest and most powerful talent agencies in the world. Each team/school’s agent is allowed to review (1) year offers to individual athletes as well as for the team. Why one year? To protect the interests of athletes like Lilly King, who was an NCAA champion as a freshman, who then became the global face for anti-doping by taking down her Russian rival on the world stage at the 2016 Rio Olympics. This way, athletes can re-up deals as they improve and aren’t tied to a decision they made their freshman year.

Same model here: 50% of funds go to the athlete’s individual sports’ team at their school—not the sports program at large and not the school at large. Naturally, schools can put into place (hopefully realistic) limitations so the athletes aren’t representing alcohol, tobacco, prescription drugs, or any other categories that might reflect poorly on the athlete, team, or school’s image.

If swimming is a “non-revenue” sport, why aren’t we already encouraging these obvious, viable, and otherwise wasted revenue streams? Additionally, with the average U.S. Olympic hopeful’s salary being $17,100/year, it is nothing short of atrocious to not allow these athletes to bank what they are offered. In swimming, I can tell you that many of the athletes and families would do exactly that. Many swimmers who graduate college have a choice to make on whether they want to keep going and pursue their Olympic dreams. Too many drop out because the insurmountable financial reality of making that choice is too much to bear, let alone overcome. Why are we preventing athletes from generating income that they can then use to train post-college, often when they need it most, as training is a full-time job. Which is why it’s difficult to be employed with a flexible schedule to support training—no matter the strength of one’s college degree.

Katie Ledecky will be fine. We put too much pressure on young athletes and their families to make the decision to “go pro” or not – ask Missy Franklin or Dagny Knutson. The swimming world loves to weigh in on what is/was the “right” or “wrong” decision for these young women. Why not eliminate at least one stressor from their life and let them compete in college AND receive the income that is offered to them. This would benefit both the individual and their team.

But these “big names” aside, I’m thinking more of the Mallorys or athletes even the biggest sports geek in the world hasn’t heard of. How do they keep going, starting from $0 as a college graduate, as someone who wants to keep going in their athletic career? Generating $10k – $100k/year while in college is only going to support the longevity of an athlete’s career, while simultaneously relieving some of the financial pressure on their families. Families, I might add, who are paying out of pocket to be there in person for their daughter or son’s conference and NCAA Championships, Nationals and Olympic Trials, World Championships, and The Olympics.

I want nothing more for athletes to be able to train and succeed with the freedom of mind of not having something like money hold them back. Implementing a 50/50, 1-year term model for athletes represented by agents appointed by their schools will allow athletes who aren’t household names yet (or ever) to have a solid base to live and train off of no matter when in the quadrennium their college career ends.

We applaud the athletes who “choose” to compete in college. Yet, I maintain that it is the NCAA’s loss for not allowing Michael Phelps to compete. Want swimming to be bigger? Wherever Michael would have chosen to swim (some may presume Michigan), would that team, program, school and the sport not have benefited? Want swimming to come out of the “non-revenue” category? The NCAA turning down the G.O.A.T. doesn’t seem to be the way to do so.

Which athletes’ families have the financial means to keep them going post-college should not determine who is the best of the best representing their country on the global stage. Beyond that, who doesn’t want to see Simone Manuel’s historic achievements celebrated further than they already are? Why shouldn’t she and her family generate some well-deserved income around her sports’ achievements? I know I’d love to see the commercials that could come from Morgan Williams’ game winning shot. Sinking a basket like that to eclipse 111-game winning streak while winning a game that takes your team to its first ever National Championship game, all while being the shortest player on the court, is what perseverance and sports’ dreams are made of. If anyone from a local coffee shop on Mississippi State’s campus to a National TV campaign wants to feature Morgan and pay her to do so, why should we hold her back?

Every year we fall in love with college athletes. I never want that 111-game winning streak ending shot to be an athlete’s career highlight, but there’s a good chance for all NCAA athletes competing that they might put up a career highlight between roughly the ages of 18-23. Why can’t we set them up to keep going in their 20’s and beyond?

Anything else is immoral.

Emily White is CEO of Dreamfuel, a funding platform for athletes. She was a Division I swimmer for Northeastern University and manages 2000, 2016 Olympic Champion Anthony Ervin and Head U.S. Olympic Women’s Swimming Coach David Marsh as a Co-Founding partner for Whitesmith Entertainment.

Leave a Reply

55 Comment threads
68 Thread replies
Most reacted comment
Hottest comment thread
79 Comment authors
newest oldest most voted
Maren A

Immoral? Really?


I actually did the math once, even if you earn a partial scholarship, let’s say $5,000 Assuming your program runs from Sep-March, approximately 26 weeks and let’s assume 20 hours a week, that’s about how long my program was. I’m not going to include long bus rides because you really could be multi-tasking there & doing your homework or having fun with your teammates. = 520 hours. $5,000/520 hours = $9.6/hr and you’re not required to pay social security, federal & state tax, etc. really this equates out to a regular employee making close to $12/hr. And that’s only with a $5,000 partial scholarship, some earn way more than that! All while you’re having fun doing the sport you committed… Read more »


big thumbs down for this article.

A non-e mouse



Frankly, swimming is largely a pretty boring sport. The market does not want to sponsor every college swim grad’s Olympic dreams. It will always be a non revenue sport.

dude 2.0

have you ever watched golf?


Golf is an amazing sport, and it’s not physically easy as well. Internationally it’s one of the more prestigious and lucrative sports in the world. And it’s very fun to watch, and even better in person at The Masters(been twice). For you to think people actually care about swimming as a market is just simply not true. This attitude is what holds our sport back, thinking that we “deserve” more funding and recognition because it’s a difficult sport. What killed swimming’s commercial marketability was taking he bodysuits away, it would make it more fun for spectators who don’t understand times, all they know is is someone breaks a record or not. I KNOW people will give me criticism for this… Read more »

dude 2.0

No. Golf is incredibly boring. And watching it is really boring. And my argument is not that swimming is “hard.” It’s that swimming is exciting to watch. So yes, I’m giving you criticism.


Ok, compare the crowds that come to golf tournaments compared to crowds that go to swim meets without Michael Phelps. That should answer the marketability question for you.

Buckeye Nation

Katie Ledecky is the most dominant athelte in the world because no one else utterly destroys everyone in the field. Not Phelps, not Tom Brady, not the Chicago Cubs, not Madrid, not anyone. Every time Katie swims HER event, she kills everyone in the pool by LAPS.


Goose, you have room to grow in your appreciation of swimming!


Trust me, I love the sport more than anything else. But I feel that is because I have been invested in the sport for so long, and understand the intricacies of swimming. To the average Joe, however, it is not nearly as entertaining. Don’t get me wrong, I would love to see swimming be popular year round, but I’m not sure it will happen in the near future.


If you find swimming boring why are you commenting on an article related to swimming posted on a site dedicated to covering the sport?


Do the math. Swimmer student athletes are compensated via full or partial scholarships as well as all the other benefits of being a college athlete, and they don’t have to wait until after graduation. Oh and by the way the continued attrition of college swim programs is indicative that swimming generally runs on a shoestring budget, even in the “rich” programs the author mistakenly highlighted. Let’s keep it on a shoestring and enjoy the sport, not greedily pursue its monetization!!


Unless you aren’t one of the 9.9 full or partial people on a team of 30+. Not saying swimmers should necessarily get paid, but the average of 1/3 of a scholarship per person is a bit underwhelming in compensation. The only sport that might be worse in ratio is XC/track. The other benefits don’t really add up to much either by comparison. Football travel per diem is astronomically higher than what a swimmer will receive on essentially the same trip.


They have the decision to go to college or to pursue a professional career. Because they have this choice, (and they know what they will be getting themselves into) they are free to make any decision they want. The only way this will change is if many of these athletes forgo college in order to become professional and these colleges start to miss them enough to pay them. In basketball (and football maybe?) there is a rule that you must attend at least one year of college before you can go into the NBA. This lack of liberty that the basketball players have is more intrusive than any lack of liberty that swimmers have. Again it is all a choice… Read more »


Yeahhhhh. Just like all of us get to choose our healthcare, correct? I don’t know why people fight FOR the institutions rather than the people. They don’t care about you or your children or your athletes. They care about money and that is that. Everyone knows how corrupt the NCAA is, yet we still argue for it like it needs defending…? It’s complete lunacy.

The Grand Inquisitor

We’re talking about SWIMMING here, not FOOTBALL or BASKETBALL. So in terms of lunacy, if you can’t incorporate this significant distinction in your commentary, your entire point of view can easily be dismissed as the rantings of a fool.

ct swim fan

You can’t go pro in football straight from high school. I think in football, your high school class has to have been graduated for 3 years before you are allowed to go to the NFL.


You have to have been in college for 3 years….


No, you just have to be 3 years out of high school. Has nothing to do with amount of time in college. And again, that’s an NFL rule, not an NCAA rule


That rule is an NBA rule, not an NCAA rule. They require one year removed from high school. The NFL requires 3 years (again, not an NCAA rule). You know what? There’s other “pro” avenues for basketball (straight to Europe from high school) and football (straight to the CFL) players. The NCAA isn’t holding anyone back from attempting those routes.

Don't want to miss anything?

Subscribe to our newsletter and receive our latest updates!